April 19, 2014, 08:52:59 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - 7enderbender

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 43
16
Software & Accessories / Re: New Monitor for Mac:wide color gamut or not?
« on: December 26, 2013, 01:25:58 PM »
[...] At first the wide gamut settings led to some garish web pages and applications, but once I set up the Dell Monitor Manager and set it to switch to sRGB for general applications, configured my monitor profile (Datacolor Spyder for me) in Firefox/Waterfox, and such, it works perfectly! [...]


Thanks for the input and the real life experience. What you mention here is really the essence of my question and also brings up what Drizzt321 brings up as a concern.

No, I still do very little paid photo work - and in this day and age I'm sure that most of it will be for web use in most cases anyway. I personally don't even own a photo printer and have no intentions in getting one. I'll rather pay the few good printing houses and let them deal with it - and few of those even consider aRGB profiles etc.

Don't get me wrong - I'd love having the option. And I'm ok with spending some extra money for that. BUT - if that means that 95% of everything else gets thrown off - meaning everything in sRGB will display with neon-reds and off greens then what's the point? I understand that there are "color aware" programs while others are not. For daily browser work I prefer Chrome - so that's already an issue from what I hear.

But then again - I'm curious about the "set it to switch for general applications" statement above. What exactly do you mean? Does this apply only to those applications that are smart enough such as Firefox or others as well?


17
Software & Accessories / Re: Black-rapid failure!
« on: December 26, 2013, 12:06:17 PM »
I'm actually surprised to not read things like that more often (snowboarding or not). I could never get myself to even consider that single screw connection. I would leave that to sports shooters and other folks who carry multiple bodies at a time - and get their geared payed for. But that's just me.

18
Software & Accessories / New Monitor for Mac:wide color gamut or not?
« on: December 26, 2013, 12:01:34 PM »
So here is the old question again: wide color gamut or not?

I finally pulled the trigger on a new Mac Mini to replace my ancient Dell desktop. Defined use for that thing will be a mix of audio recording, photo editing and basic general use. I specifically went with the Mini as opposed to an iMac to not get stuck with the shiny 27" all in one monitor design.

Of the 27" ~$1000 monitor options such as Dell or NEC there seem to be plenty that are now extremely good for the money and they have finally worked out the anti-glare coating issues. Connectivity on especially the Dell models is great (better than the Apple Thunderbolt really). So it comes down to the old issues with wide gamut over sRGB standard models.

Does anyone have any recent experiences, e.g. with the Dell U2713H (wide gamut) vs U2713HM (standard)? Or can anyone make a compelling argument for the Apple Thunderbolt display (shiny which I don't like, USB2, no option to connect a second old PC)? Or should I keep it simple and go with one of the mid range NECs which lose in the connectivity department but may be overall better quality?

For calibration I already have the Xrite ColorMunki Display (which I know is not compatible with Dell's hardware calibration but should work just fine with a software profile I think).


19
Canon General / Re: Why Wedding Photographers’ Prices are “Wack”?
« on: December 24, 2013, 09:01:38 AM »
I think at the core of the counter argument in that two-year old craigslist rant lies why few photographers make a decent living if they're trying to go full time. And why so many then do stuff that they probably never signed up for (I personally have no interests in shooting weddings).

What do I mean? It's really an economic argument. The photographer who responded to the cranky bride makes a classic mistake: argue with cost. The thing is, cost is completely irrelevant for the value you're selling. It's only relevant for your own book keeping and as a market entry barrier (or lack thereof really in photography).
Anyone, in any line of business who is calculating their prices as a function of their cost will not be doing well most likely. Not always a popular viewpoint where many folks still remember the good-old-cost-plus-markup.

I could go on and on about it and draw some parallels with the problems in my main line of work in the healthcare sector. But that usually gets me in trouble ;-)

Just some food for thought.

20
CPS is aimed for Professionals, and i'm sure if they were to find out that you were not a professional, you could lose your status.  Being both a professional and a CPS member, i find threads like these kind of sad, but, for those who take advantage and bend the rules for your own gain, karma always comes back around...

What is sad are posts like these as they appear to be judgmental and pompous. What, may I ask are the criteria for being a "professional?" Where is the line drawn? Primary source of income? Your main job? How many gigs you've done? How often someone has paid for an image of yours? The level of ambiguity to this determination is huge to an extent to which I don't believe you have given any thought.

I don't quite understand how anyone is taking advantage or bending the rules. I'm quite certain that if Canon/CPS was overly concerned about making their memberships exclusive only to high level pros, they would do so. I tend to believe based on the way things are set up that they are really only concerned about whether you have spent enough money on their stuff.

I have a career which pays me very well which allows me to have the luxury of owning a lot of gear without having to do photography as a job. I do paid gigs for fun here and there and have plenty of gear which doesn't all necessarily get used on those jobs. Does that make me not a professional? Am I not qualified to get my equipment worked on?

Canon sells products and provides a way for you to get them serviced which also costs money. Who is anyone to tell another photog they shouldn't be allowed to have membership if they are willing to pay the money for both?

I'm pretty sure there is a higher likelihood of running into some bad karma when you are being wrongfully judgmental of others and/or being full of yourself.

I fully agree. And not to start another argument over what "professional" means, but especially in a difficult field like this I look at this question more as driven by results more than anything else. Very few people make a good living as a full time pro photographer I would argue. And even then a lot of the income may not come directly from taking photos these days but from workshops, web services, etc.

It doesn't matter. I personally take on professional gigs every now and then - and by that I mean I get hired or asked because of my results. More often then not I do this for charity. I have a "regular" job and at the moment would likely not be able to make that same kind of money with photography that I make in my day job. That's my choice.

And with that it was also my choice to buy a lot of Canon equipment. This is Canon's business model after all. They make a professional line of camera gear and then a lot of "normal" guys (and some gals) go and buy Canon stuff as well. In return they offer a few discounts on repairs and cleanings to folks who have bought enough. How I make my money to spend on their gear is non of their business. And when talking to them I got the impression that they don't care. They actually want people to sign up. In my case even after  I broke a lens. They want members. It's a marketing tool. They want happy customers who will by more stuff later. It's not some fancy privilege. It's a discount on repairs. And a loaner program to tickle you for the next thing on your list.

21
Are there any other benefits of joining CPS? That is, none of my gear has needed repairs and while cleaning is free a couple of times a year, shipping is not (if I recall)-- so it pretty much cancels out on my end.

So, besides a fancy neck strap, is there anything else an amateur photog like me is forgetting? I've read through the list, but I didn't feel like anything jumped out at me.

I qualify for Gold status and was happy to sign up when I needed a repair of my 200mm. And they were fine with me upgrading to gold after the lens broke.

Benefits: discount on the repair, sold the silly strap, free cleanings and a few loaners. Turned out to be a wash.

22
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 135mm f/2 DG OS Art Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 17, 2013, 10:53:37 AM »
It's great if there are more choices. I'm happy with my 135L and don't want OS/IS. BUT if Sigma delivers something with similar optical qualities with better build quality/less plastic I'd be curious at least.

I've never been too thrilled with the cheap feel of the EF lenses (coming from Canon FD). So there is a market for things that feel more solid.

23
I personally would rule out the 6D for myself for other reasons. AF performance is not necessarily one of them. Few examples:

I have a 5DII and the AF is considered "bad" on this one. It works for me. In fact, I recently shot an event with my 5DII and a 5DIII. The results in the end and the number of keepers from each camera were pretty similar. I didn't think the number of AF points on the Mark III was particularly helpful. They are centered around the middle just like on any other modern AF camera. If they were spread out further it may be a different story but just having more points in more or less the same center section of the frame doesn't change much for me. Yes, it's a bit faster and all, but like I said under real life circumstances I found no reason to spend more money and switch. I'd rather spend the money on a second 5DII actually.

With the 6D I'm pretty sure it's the same thing. It'll work just fine for most applications. In fact, I was just messing around with an old Nikon N6006 film body and found the one AF center point quite refreshing. Shockingly, that thing isn't really that much slower or finicky in low light compared to today's stuff - and we're talking a straight consumer product. Just a wee bit more noisy ;-)

24
EOS-M / Re: Eos M vs Fujifilm X100
« on: December 14, 2013, 05:54:20 PM »
I personally wouldn't go near anything without an optical viewfinder (of sorts).

The X100s is still on my short list. No interest in the EOS M at all.

The Fuji would make a good travel companion and always-in-the-backpack-camera for everyday.

I wish it came with a classic 45 or 55 lens instead of the 35 equivalent though.

25
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 vs canon 24-70 ii
« on: December 09, 2013, 08:48:05 AM »
This question keeps crossing my mind as well. And I keep watching the price of the 24-70. I think it's still too pricy for what it is. Yes, optically it's great but I don't like the plastic build quality.

But once it reaches the original price of the version one - maybe. I have the 24-105 and it is a really good lens. My only issue with it that it's f/4 which for what I often do limits its usefulness. IS is pointless in my book.

So the best use for it is landscape stuff (which I rarely do) and standard studio type portraits.

For that it is actually very good believe it or not. Maybe I lucked out with a sharper copy but there are are really no issues. Excellent value lens.

Still thinking to add a good version 1 24-70 at some point.

26
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF50mm f/1.4 USM
« on: November 27, 2013, 12:56:38 PM »
Love this lens.  Really needed the ability to micro adjust on my T1i, but once adjusted on the 5Diii, it was like a having a new lens.

All images shot on the T1i

I'm confused. So are you telling yourself that your lens needed adjustment, so you adjusted it on a 5Diii and are now using it again on your T1i and think the lens is now "adjusted" via the other camera?

In any case - it's a nice lens. If it came with better build quality I would have likely never switched to the 50L. Still using a 70s/80s FD 50 1.4 with film which in fact is really the same lens still only much better built than the plastic EF cousin.

27
EOS Bodies / Re: How can I choose between 1DX and 5D MARK III?
« on: November 26, 2013, 09:15:18 AM »
It all depends on specific purposes. I would even rephrase the original question: is there a pressing reason to upgrade the existing 5DII? In my experience no. I took both to a shoot recently and could not tell the difference in picture quality for all practical purposes.

Is there something measurable? Yes, probably. But image quality difference is not convincing me to shell out thousands of dollars on new bodies.

Are there other reasons to go with a MarkIII or 1Dx? Plenty. But only the individual photographer and buyer can discern that. No camera today is "ideal" in my book. All have advantages and disadvantages. Some of this is probably by design for marketing purposes. So everyone needs to find their own sweet spots for specific purposes, even if all of those are great multipurpose cameras. First world problems really in the end.

28
EOS Bodies / Re: This is the Way a White Camera Should be Done
« on: November 26, 2013, 09:04:59 AM »
Very nice!

And yes, I would totally want a digital version of it. Make it full-frame, give me a 28, a fast 50 and 90mm lens and I'm done. No AF, no gizmos - basically a more affordable Canon version of the Leica M. Just like in the old days.


29


Sorry, but I can't resist posting this link about...how to be a Professional Photographer:


I get tickled every time I watch this..or the ones that follow in her series....


Oh boy. That's like fingernails on chalkboard. A) Because there are people (and not just females) who talk like this for real and B) Because it shows some of the recent gender bias that has started to develop in some industries. No, I don't think that the stereotypical guys who used to dominate certain industries were any "better" in that sense. But I've been watching a lot of the Creative Live features recently. You know the types I'm talking about. Some of those chicks have pretty good business sense I must say. And some are very good photographers, no doubt, while others I find deliver shockingly mediocre results.
But they all seem to get much better access these days to all sorts of situations where guys seem to have a harder and harder time based on the changed image of who and what is a photographer.

Don't get me wrong: I wish them all much success. Everyone is responsible for their own thing. Who cares how you get there.

I take it that most of us here are guys. Which seems to be rather typical these days. The famous pro guys are all tech guys. You know, those who tour the country to show some sweaty overweight guys named Chuck how to correctly use PocketWizards and their new camera. (Full disclosure: I watch a lot of those guys' videos, read the books and should really lose another 15lb...). Most guys known for their actual photography are mostly from a generation before that (yes, there are always exceptions). And then there is the new wave of female pros known for their California hipster style wedding photography (barf) or baby photographers to the celebrities (more barf) and so forth.

So to the original point: camera doesn't matter really (well it does,  but not really). It's about the marketing. How can Chucky and his friends be comfortable out there and get paid appropriately these days? Other than as a sports photographer that is.

30
Lenses / Re: Canon Extension Tube has S/N?
« on: November 21, 2013, 10:00:24 AM »
I have received the 2 Canon extension tubes EF12II & EF25II. The only writing on the tubes was "1301" on the EF25II and "1201" on the EF12II. So my question are these S/N?
On the box there are several more writings, for the EF25II:
CZ 23522000DB0107
9199A001 [AA]
EAN/JAN 4 960999 204307
UPC  0 13803 03560 5
Searching the web EAN is probably Electronic Article Number, JAN is Japanese Article Number and UPC is Uniform Part Code.
no "1301" in any of the above.


As far as I remember: no they don't have serial numbers. I had the same question when I bought mine.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 43